Spreadbury v. Bitterroot Public Library et al

Filing 208

ORDER denying 205 Motion to Amend/Correct with leave to renew. Signed by Jeremiah C. Lynch on 1/31/2012. (TCL, ) Modified on 2/1/2012 to reflect copy mailed to Spreadbury this date (APP, ).

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA MISSOULA DIVISION _____________________________________________ MICHAEL E. SPREADBURY, CV 11-64-M-DWM-JCL Plaintiff, vs. ORDER BITTERROOT PUBLIC LIBRARY, CITY OF HAMILTON, LEE ENTERPRISES, INC., BOONE KARLBERG, P.C., DR. ROBERT BROPHY, TRISTA SMITH, NANSU RODDY, JERRY STEELE, STEVE SNAVELY, STEVEN BRUNER-MURPHY, RYAN OSTER, KENNETH S. BELL, and JENNIFER LINT, Defendants. _____________________________________________ Defendant Lee Enterprises, Inc. moves for an amended scheduling order extending the present schedule by 90 days. Counsel for Lee Enterprises, however, did not include within the text of the motion a statement indicating that the other parties to this action were contacted relative to the motion and whether they oppose it as required by L.R. 7.1(c)(1). Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that pursuant to L.R. 7.1(c)(4) Lee Enterprises’ motion is summarily DENIED with leave to renew the motion upon compliance with L.R. 7.1(c)(1). If Lee -1- Enterprises renews its motion it need only confer with Plaintiff Michael Spreadbury under L.R. 7.1(c)(1) relative to its motion because Spreadbury’s claims against Lee Enterprises will be tried separately from Spreadbury’s claims against the other Defendants. DATED this 31st day of January, 2012. /s/ Jeremiah C. Lynch Jeremiah C. Lynch United States Magistrate Judge -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?